Author Topic: State of Umpiring [merged]  (Read 267186 times)

Jackstar

  • Guest
Re: Umpiring
« Reply #15 on: April 09, 2006, 12:24:53 PM »


Along with you MT, I'm still flabbergasted that they bounced the ball after Thursty was taken off when we had clear possession when the game was stopped.....NOT HAPPY...... :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead
Quote

Unfortunately, they are the rules :(

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 57908
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Umpiring
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2006, 05:43:04 PM »
That rule needs changing them. How ridiculous can you get >:(.

And what about Simmonds having his mark (in front of goal btw) taken off him. The ball was within 5 metres and he only used his body (cause his arms were in the air) to bump his opponent sideways and yet he was free kicked. The saints ended up scoring a goal from that passage of play. Wonder if it made a difference to the score...hmmm let me see, no shot on goal for us and a goal for them - 12 point turnaraound in a game we lost by 1 points.

The ump penalised Simmo for being stronger  ???. Another example that most of the umps these days have no understanding of the game. Even if something is technically there if it's incidental contact and had no effect on the play it should not be a free.
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 57908
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
State of Umpiring [merged]
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2008, 09:57:53 PM »
I must have missed the memo that said the holding the ball rule no longer exists  ???

Just 1 free kick to us (to the Dees 9) in a half of footy. What a joke  :scream.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2008, 03:26:13 AM by one-eyed »
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Umpiring / Holding the ball rule - RIP
« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2008, 08:58:38 AM »

I must have missed the memo that said the holding the ball rule no longer exists  ???

It's been archived into the same place as push in the back.  I reckon that there were 3 or 4 direct goals scored from blatant frees not being paid.

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 38899
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Umpiring / Holding the ball rule - RIP
« Reply #19 on: June 16, 2008, 08:24:00 PM »
Main recipient of this "change" on Sunday....

Brock McLean - couldn't believe, not once but twice  :banghead :banghead
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 57908
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Umpiring / Holding the ball rule - RIP
« Reply #20 on: June 29, 2008, 04:06:06 AM »
More convinced umps don't want to or are instructed not to pay holding the ball anymore. I still can't understand why early in the last quarter by the MCC members that Carlton player wasn't pinged for holding the ball?  ??? If that isn't holding the ball then the rule not longer exists. A crucial point in the game too with the scores still close. 
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 95354
    • One-Eyed Richmond
State of Umpiring [merged]
« Reply #21 on: April 04, 2009, 05:09:24 PM »
Bondy on 3aw just confirmed.

A Tiger caller rang up saying the umps cost us the game as even the commentators said during the game they were soft frees and 50 metres except for the double goal where Moore got pinged. Bucks replied you can't blame the umps for a game as it evens out. Richmond lost Richmond the game in the last quarter.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2009, 05:34:13 AM by one-eyed »

Online Chuck17

  • The Shaun Grugg of OER
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13125
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #22 on: April 04, 2009, 05:14:46 PM »
That one against Jackson was complete bs, he was halfyway in the tackle when disposal was made.  Nothing in Jacksons tackle at all, stop stuffing with the game leave the rules alone, all it does is leave crappy rules and crappier interpretation.  :banghead

Tigermonk

  • Guest
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #23 on: April 04, 2009, 05:40:42 PM »
Umpiring for both side was shocking
no wonder with a idiot like Geoff Geishien running the umpires
fair dinkum umpiring in the AFL is at its worst

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 57908
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2009, 05:49:43 PM »
Umpiring for both side was shocking
no wonder with a idiot like Geoff Geishien running the umpires
fair dinkum umpiring in the AFL is at its worst
The rules comes from the top = Adrian Anderson  :banghead. Too busy looking for soft ticky-touchwood frees off the ball and incidental contact rather than having the umps focus on the contest. Last night's umpiring display was a joke thanks to McBurney and today was no different.

They've also changed the interpretation of holding the ball. Prior opportunity has suddenly gone. That call against Whitey was laughable. He had no chance.

Moore getting pinged is the rule by the letter of the law and he was dumb to do it but Mark Williams is right. The game is so precious now. Like that has any effect on the actual game  ::).
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline Fishfinger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2465
  • You can't put brains in an idiot
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #25 on: April 04, 2009, 05:54:18 PM »
You can choose your friends but not your family, TM.
It's 50 of one and half a dozen of the other - Don Scott

Offline 2JD

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #26 on: April 04, 2009, 06:27:04 PM »
I actually feel a little sorry for the umpires, they struggle to get the rules right, then some morons go and change them or add some. It's such a fast game that I'm sure some blow their whistles a little to early to cover their ass, but then have to follow through. The AFL are the d*cks, the umpires are just the poor schmuks stuck in the middle.


Did I just stick up for the maggots????? :shh

Tigermonk

  • Guest
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #27 on: April 04, 2009, 06:45:30 PM »
You can choose your friends but not your family, TM.

haha Fishy you had to stab me with that one didn't you  ;D :thumbsup

Offline bojangles17

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5618
  • Platinum member 33 years
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #28 on: April 04, 2009, 06:57:57 PM »
some of those decisions were farcical...how on earth could have jackson avoided that , he would have had to immediately stop swingging GA half way to the ground at which point he released the ball...impossibly...I thought this rule was supposed to snub out the Milburn tackle on edwards last yr that was miles too long and rough...bloody outraged...well done umpires butchered the game :clapping
RFC 1885, Often Imitated, Never Equalled

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 57908
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: 4 goals 2 points to Geelong from 50 metre frees
« Reply #29 on: April 04, 2009, 07:25:26 PM »
They showed the Jacko one on Before the Game. So you're now meant to stop a tackle halfway through  ???.

Apologies to Kel. It was Luke who punched the ball away behind the goal. Very silly brain fade.
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd